Renault Megane 2000 vs Nissan Almera 1995
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 107 HP | 99 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 136 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 8 HP more power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 12 NM more than Nissan Almera. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Used also on Nissan Primera | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger. Renault Megane is 30 cm longer than the Nissan Almera, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1310 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 170 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | no data | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`595 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Nissan Almera has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Nissan Almera, so Nissan Almera quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |